|
Welcome to the Weekly Report. This week I have to highlight conditions in
the bond markets as a priority, we maybe about to endure a bust of quite large
proportions. I will also look at some longer term stock market indicators,
confirmation that the Bank of England will follow the US and show why the current
rally in stocks is due to a visit from an old friend, as readers at Livecharts.co.uk will
know only too well.
Before we begin I need to comment on something I read this week.
- "Hedge funds played their part in the violent rise in spot prices early
this year. To that extent they can be held responsible for the death of
African and Asian children. Tougher margin rules on the commodity exchanges
might have stopped the racket. Capitalism must police itself, or be policed."
Who wrote this, some socialist leaning European, a US Treasury/Fed spokesperson?
Maybe it was the remnants of a socialist/communist government in the Caribbean?
No, no one like that, it was none other thanAmbrose
Evans-Pritchard, International Business Editor at The Telegraph.
Here is how he describes his orientation to all things economic:
- "For the record, I am a Burkean conservative,
aged 50, with a libertarian bent, and a penchant for Monetarist and Austrian economics
- though Keynes had
a point in the Slump."
Well at least he has all the bases covered, I suppose. Unfortunately all it
shows is a confused methodology toward economic thinking. Some of his influences
are in direct conflict (vitally about the Slump) and Ludwig von Mises is probably
spinning in his grave.
What is more worrying is that AE-P is allowed to write such bilge as we see
in his remarks about Hedge Funds. (I have no connection, in any way, to Hedge
Funds.) Hedge Funds didn't cause the rise in soft commodities, they did not
enable it. To say that they did (even partly) and are responsible for mass
starvation shows a complete lack of understanding about the true nature of
monetary inflation and Central Bank sterilisation methods and their destabilising
effects on free markets. Yet thousands of readers will have taken that statement
as a fact.
Without me saying this is the cause, a simple point about the rising costs
of transportation of foodstuffs, shortages and pricing mechanisms blows his
statement out of the water. He also seems to forget a very simple rule, for
every buyer, there is a seller. Who sold to the buying hedge funds at prices
that were acceptable? No mention of that I see.
Hedge Funds operate in a (supposedly) free market. They buy and sell as they
feel fit, just like everyone else does. They make profits and when they make
losses, they go bust, unlike certain banks or brokers who get centralist protection
and bailouts. Capitalism polices Hedge Funds, they either survive or go under.
If they do something illegal, fine, regulators should get the batons out and
beat them to a pulp.
Instead what do we see in the mainstream media - shrill and hysterical statements
pointing the blame at those funds operating correctly in a free market. Calls
for more regulation and as I mentioned would happen not long ago, calls to
restrict margin availability. If AE-P truly believes what he wrote, he needs
to expand upon it. If he wrote it to garner readers he should change his "credentials".
Ambrose, if you read this and want to reply feel free.
I am seriously concerned that many are not ready for what is to come in the
US bond markets, especially US Treasuries. As we have witnessed the Federal
Reserve is happily swapping lower rated debt, stuff that no other lender wants
as collateral, for US Treasuries to enable Bank and Broker credit to be continued.
Now, in a way this could be viewed as a neutral debt creation policy, a swapping
of assets rather than new issuance. However that situation is about to change
and bond markets are beginning to price in the effects:
- The Treasury's two-year note sale on April 23 may tally $30 billion,
according to Jersey City, New Jersey-based Wrightson ICAP, which specializes
in U.S. government finance. That would be the most ever sold for the maturity,
according to the Treasury. The government may sell $20 billion of five-year
notes the following day, which would be the most since 2003, according
to Wrightson. The government announces the amounts April 21. (Bloomberg)
As discussed in the last 2
Occasional Letters this should come as no surprise, issuance of Government
debt is required to lend credibility to increased inflation expectations.
(You didn't think I did all that theoretical work for no reason did you?)
It will not be the last surge of treasuries into the markets either.
Bond markets are faced with further supply, as we can see here:
-
NEW YORK, April 18 (Reuters) - U.S. high-grade corporate bond issuance
hit a record in April as companies took advantage of improving market
sentiment and strong investor demand for new deals.
U.S. investment-grade corporate bond volume totaled $50.7 billion through
April 18, according to research firm Dealogic. The previous record for
this month was in April 2001, when companies sold $47.35 billion of high-quality
debt.
This week's issuance alone included a few marquee deals from a finance
subsidiary of General Electric Co, JPMorgan Chase &, XTO Energy and
Lehman Brothers. General Electric Capital Corp's $8.5 billion transaction
was the fifth-largest U.S. corporate bond sale since 1995.
On top of all this is the new muscle beginning to be flexed by the GSE's,
for example:
-
WASHINGTON (AP) - Mortgage finance company Freddie Mac said Thursday
it would buy up to $15 billion in home loans for higher-priced properties,
using new flexibility granted by Congress earlier this year.
Freddie Mac, the second-largest U.S. financier and guarantor of home
mortgages, said it would buy the mortgages of up to nearly $730,000 from
Wells Fargo & Co., JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Washington Mutual
Inc.
Richard Syron, chief executive of the McLean, Va.-based-company said
the move "shows how we can bring new liquidity to markets other investors
have all but abandoned and make full use of the new tools Congress gave
us to help restore stability during the current housing crisis."
I am not going to discuss all the ins and outs of the debt issuance and credit
expansion again as it has been covered elsewhere. What we can see is the emergence
of debt issuance has been reignited, thanks to the back stop provided by the
Federal Reserve. Here is moral hazard writ large, as new debt is used not to
shore up current positions but is creating further liabilities.
For the first time in many a year, it appears that the bond markets are reacting
to this increased supply as confirmation that the US Govt and the Federal Reserve
truly intend to inflate over the longer term and are decoupling from the Fed
Fund Rate(2.25%) along with LIBOR.




Why do I think this is an inflation related move, rather than LIBOR reacting
to tightness in credit conditions? Simple, supply of debt is increasing and
the financial market is underwritten by the Fed. As Doug
Noland puts it (and I agree):
- "When the Fed and Washington radically altered the rules of U.S. finance
last month, they placed in jeopardy huge positions that had been put in
place to hedge against and profit from systemic crisis. With the end of "Stage
one" arises a major short squeeze in the Credit, equities, and derivatives
markets. And when it comes to contemplating the scope and ramifications
of today's "hedging" activities, we're clearly in Uncharted Waters. It
is not beyond reason that a disorderly unwind of "bearish" Credit market
positions could incite a mini bout of liquidity, speculation, and Credit
excess that exacerbates Global Monetary Instability - while Setting the
Backdrop for Stage Two of the Crisis."
From my viewpoint I expect yields to go north and I may have something that
shows this beginning:

Click on the image to view the live yield curve at Stockcharts.com.
The black line is the latest curve, the green shadow is the recent past. Yield
across the curve is rising, not just in the 2year-5year window. As Doug Noland
said, if markets are set up for an anticipated scenario, in this case a recession
and slowdown and have priced accordingly, then intervention will have a destabilising
effect.
For bonds that means a sell off, and the possibility of the long end (30 year)
yield climbing significantly. If the Fed cut at the next meeting, it could
be enough to trigger a panic steepening trade, reinforced by stops being hit.
Here is the nasty bit.
To read the rest of the Weekly Report and view the new website, click here.
|